starcraftfandomcom-20200213-history
Talk:StarCraft Wiki
Archives: Archive 1 A Galaxy in Chaos In the distant future a small group of human exiles have been doomed to fight for survival on the edge of the galaxy. Through military strength, espionage and deceit, a unified Terran government has maintained an uneasy peace. As resources run short, however, these Confederate nations find themselves looking towards the rich worlds of their alien neighbors, the enigmatic Protoss. To further complicate matters, it seems that a previously unknown and deadly species known only as the Zerg has entered Protoss space and is destroying everything in its path. The time for war has come... (http://www.blizzard.com/starcraft/) Link to the website http://www.blizzard.com/starcraft/ II: Terran Factions I. Sons of Korhal Ia. Terran Dominion 2. Confederacy 2a. Alpha Squadron 2b. Omega Squadron 2c. Nova Squadron 3. Kel-Morian Combine There's a new novel out: StarCraft: Queen of Blades. Please add this to the front page. PsiSeveredHead 03:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC) Featured article link Does anyone know how the Featured Article section was created? It's too complicated for me to change (and these articles need to be rotated sometimes). PsiSeveredHead 04:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC) :If you edit this section, you should be able to change the text starting from the StarCraft Episode 0 link (just ignore the part above that which affects the style. Angela (talk) 08:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC) Spoilers What exactly is the criteria for using a spoiler warning? They seem to be employed mostly at random; some are even used when describing events that were detailed in the instruction manual! Personally, I don't think anything can really be called a spoiler anymore, given that the game's been out for almost ten years, but what does everyone else think? - Dark T Zeratul 03:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC) There's nearly three hundred articles, and I haven't gone through them all. Despite all the edits, I don't actually spend much time on the wiki. There are still articles with broken red links too. On another note, sometimes you'll get an article that looks like this: *Prequel (spoiler) *Material from the manual *Material from the game (spoiler) It's a bit difficult to avoid "spoilerizing" the manual's material at that point. At least for the articles I've written, anything not from the manuals (or from the back of a novel) gets the spoiler tag. PsiSeveredHead 04:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC) : The problem is, given that the material from the manual actually makes up a minority of the information about characters and events, doing it that way would require spoiler-tagging virtually everything. And, as I said, the game's been out for almost ten years. I very much doubt that anyone interested in this page would have not yet played it. - Dark T Zeratul 05:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC) ::I suggest the general disclaimer say that Starcraft Wiki contains spoilers. That way, users are warned that the Wiki aims to be as comprehensive as possible, and that they should be careful of what they click if they do not want things spoiled. -ED 02:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC) :::Does anybody else think that the spoiler alert should be more prominent and have a border like in Wikipedia so that it'll be more clearly and visible? ::::I recommend we move the spoiler warning to a General disclaimer or something like that, and then add it to the welcome template. That way, users know that all of Starcraft Wiki contains spoilers and we don't have to put spoiler warnings everywhere. -ED 17:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC) WoWWiki and more Hello! I am Kirkburn, and I help out Wikia with their gaming wikis. In addition I am a lead admin of WoWWiki. I would love to see more closer work between the Blizzard wikis. You may not know, but there is a good little selection of Blizz-related wikis on Wikia now. For example blizzard.wikia.com and diablo.wikia.com plus a whole lot more linked on the Blizzard wiki. I have been suggesting a few things to Wikia to try and improve the networking between the two, but I thought I'd start it off by mentioning them here :) Meanwhile, personally, I think this site would work really well with a dark colour scheme, in keeping with SC - has this ever been a thought? Anyway, I think you havea great site and a good MP design. Simple is good :) Thanks for your time! Kirkburn (talk) 08:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Um, not my place to make judgement, but I find myself agreeing with the darker colour scheme. We all know about StarCraft's gritty underbelly ;) --Hawki 13:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Terran Artillery Unit What is this Terran unit which appears in the cutscene in the middle of the Protoss campaign,called The Ambush? Rethas 16:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC) Whatever it is, it certainly isn't a Siege Tank. Unfortunatly, it's never been expanded upon and was probably the result of the cinematic team taking artistic licence. At the best, if a screenshot can be obtained, it could go in a sub-section of the Siege Tank page.--Hawki 20:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC) This was posted so long ago, so there's no source :( but Blizzard said it wasn't a standard unit. (Neither is the jeep Sarge and Lester were driving in.) Unlike StarCraft I, StarCraft II will let you make NPC units if/when you need them. PsiSeveredHead 23:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC) I know this is not the Siege Tank.But OK,nevermind. Anyway,what's this "container" used in Amerigo and Inauguration cinematics? --Rethas 17:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC) I don't recall any such container in The Inaguration but the explosive on the Amerigo is a cold fusion nuke.--Hawki 21:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC) Err,I don't mean the nuke,but these floating boxes used to carry troopers.One was used to bring the demolition team onboard the Amerigo. --Rethas 07:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC) I'm guessing it's a ship designed to shuttle over personel and supplies in a fleet. Can't really name it though, as it's not a Dropship and its too smalll for a shuttle.--Hawki 22:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC) Wasn't that jeep a Stinger, shown in Ghost? I believe it fits the description, albeit in a purely recon role without an obvious weapon placement. Pix 22:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC) It may have led to the idea of a Stinger, but Stingers have six wheels, and that jeep only had four. It couldn't have been a Stinger. PsiSeveredHead 23:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC) The logo... It's my personal view, but don't you think that logo isn't really suitable for StarCraft wikia? I'd understand if it were the eye of Overmind, but a Zergling... I don't like the present logo. Can't it be changed? StarShade 16:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC) It was a quick pick before BlizzCon. PsiSeveredHead 23:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC) Main Page design Hullo! I'm Kirkburn, a Wikia Gaming Helper, and I have a few suggestions to make regarding the Main Page. You may be interested in stealing some code from w:c:starter which is the current new wiki base design. It makes content a bit easier to add and is easily expanded. Keep up the great work! Kirkburn (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC) In the interests of preventing an admin edit war, I'm going to leave it open to discussion as to whether the main page should be stacked or spread out. I'm personally inclined to the latter, as it's far easier to read and the links are more horizontally orientated rather than bunched up in narrow columns. Still, that's just one opinion out of many.--Hawki 22:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) During the March Zerg Rush event, my internet connection died and I edited the wiki from an internet cafe using IE. The main page looked very vertical. It's possible the main page just looks different to each of us. Kimera 757 (talk) 22:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Doesn't seem that way. The last edit I made on the main page had it extended out. After Meco edited it, it was stacked. Check the recent page history and you can see the difference.--Hawki 22:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC) I just checked it out. The width looks exactly the same to me/my computer, and there's virtually no height difference. I wish I could show you a screenshot of how the Main Page looked different on that other computer, because it was a dramatic difference. I say put it to a vote. (It doesn't just have to us to decide it.) But my computer isn't picking up any width difference (and hardly any height difference) so I'm basically voting for ... both. Sorry I'm no help on this. Kimera 757 (talk) 00:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC) I just checked the difference out with Internet Explorer, and there it's ... huge. It seems the browser is more important than the computer itself. I have to agree with Hawki, the new design is too tall/narrow in Internet Explorer. (It still looks identical in Firefox, though.) Hawki, are you using IE? How about you Meco? Kimera 757 (talk) 00:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC)